





































GeorGia Journal of readinG 6 Volume 41, number 2   2018

scenario
For the first time in his school career, my son, Brennan, 
struggled. He went from a kid who loved school to 
one who didn’t care about it anymore. His grades 
were slipping, and he really didn’t care. Reading and 
writing practice passages would come home with 
failing grades and notes from his 4th grade teacher 
stating, “No Strategies Used” in red pen. I would ask 
him why he didn’t use strategies, and he would shrug 
his shoulders and say, “I don’t know.” As a former 
teacher myself, I would look over some questions and 
bring to his attention ones he missed. His response 
was, “I’m just not as smart as the other kids.” This 
happened repeatedly throughout the school year. 
It got even worse as the dreaded standardized test 
approached. More practice passages came home with 
failing grades and tears flowed from my son’s eyes. It’s 
heartbreaking watching your very smart child, whose 
love of learning has been squashed; call himself 
“stupid” all because the focus of his class is this test.

Parent’s Perspective
The context surrounding struggling readers, relating 
i became personally more interested on the topic of 
high-stakes testing due to the emphasis being placed 
on my own child and how he has been reacting to 
the pressure. His grades have plummeted as it has 
become closer to testing dates, and he does not like 
to read or write anymore. The excitement of learning is 

being taken away to be able to prepare for a test that 
is shallow at best. more and more school districts have 
implemented a “one size fits all” type curriculum and 
are holding teachers accountable for their students’ 
scores on these tests. Teachers are changing their 
own teaching styles in order to prepare for these tests 
and losing out on valuable teaching.

When i was teaching, years ago, i strived to come 
up with creative ways to get the students interested 
in reading a certain novel, writing stories, or even 
learning different skills. This kept both advanced and 
reluctant students engaged in the learning process. in 
everything i taught, i tried to help the students make 
real-world connections. i wanted my students to read 
stories, novels, and expository text that interested and 
intrigued them and helped them begin to understand 
the world in which we live. i wanted to take advantage 
of the imaginative rehearsals that great literature 
provides before my students reached adulthood 
(Gallagher, 2009). if our emphasis as educators is 
testing, our students will miss out on more than just 
passing a test. 

i recently shared my concerns about the current 
emphasis on teaching to the test with one of my 
professors from my Master’s in Reading program. This 
article is a result of our discussions about the sense of 
urgency we both feel that things in our schools must 

Teaching to the 
Test from a Parent’s 

Perspective
by amy KettLe anD meLinDa miLLer



GeorGia Journal of readinG 7 Volume 41, number 2   2018

change in order for our students to become proficient 
readers and writers who can do much more than pass 
a test. it is our hope that teachers and administrators 
who read the article will discover meaningful ways to 
help their students develop as life-long learners who 
read and write for a variety of purposes.

Narrowing of the curriculum
Higgins, miller, and Wegmann (2007) emphasize 
that the current high-stakes assessment trend in 
the united States moves in the direction of greater 
standardization and uniformity, due to legislation 
(Campbell, 2002) such as the no Child left behind act 
(2002). “Given the on-going climate of accountability,” 
according to the authors, “most schools and districts 
see no alternative other than to work toward meeting 
the states’ standards and legislative mandates” (p. 
319). No Child Left Behind (2002) had two specific 
goals: for all students to attain proficiency in reading 
and mathematics by 2013-14, and by the same years, 
for all students to be proficient in reading by the end of 
third grade (readence, bean & baldwin, 2008).

With the pressure created by the new legislation came 
the push to teach to the test, which more often than not, 
came in the form of one-size-fits-all test preparation 
activities. The problem is that each student learns 
at a different pace and brings different experiences 
to the table. Though proponents of nClb (2002) 
may proclaim that higher test scores prove nClb is 
working, the reality is rising test scores are primarily 
the result of repetitive drilling for the narrow content the 
exams cover, not real educational improvements. The 
unfortunate result is that groups that have traditionally 
fallen behind such as minority groups, students with 
special needs, and english language learners, may 
be falling further behind (national Center for fair and 
open Testing, 2007). When testing drives instruction, 
subject areas that are not tested are frequently not 
taught, and the current trend is to eliminate science, 
social studies and electives altogether in order to 
focus on reading and math. When this happens, 
students miss out on content-rich lessons in other 
subjects that would ultimately help them on a state-
mandated test. additionally, such practices remove 
important opportunities for students to widen and 
deepen knowledge that is foundational to developing 
readers. Without a broad knowledge base, our 
students stand no chance of being excellent readers 

(Gallagher 2009). Students involved in massive test 
preparation classes receive massive amounts of 
shallow instruction (Gallagher, 2009).

teaching to the test
When the curriculum is narrowed, many teachers lose 
the opportunity to teach in ways that are compatible 
with their professional identities (berliner, 2009).
Teachers often feel pressure from administrators to 
teach to the test, which results in changing of teaching 
styles to “better fit” teaching to the test. This type of 
teaching instruction sacrifices students’ critical thinking. 
according to miller and Higgins, (2008), “nationwide, 
teachers have even departed from what they know 
about effective teaching and learning because the 
effects of low test results have strong repercussions, 
such as students failing to pass a specific grade or to 
graduate” (p.124). Administrators also hold teachers 
responsible for their students’ test scores. Being “held 
responsible” really means one thing to classroom 
teachers—teaching to the state-mandated exams 
administered each spring (Gallagher, 2009). many 
teachers who teach to the test tend to teach skills in 
isolation, and rich, meaningful curriculum instruction is 
replaced with kill and drill practices.

Gallagher (2009) coined the term “readicide,” which 
he defines as “the systematic killing of the love of 
reading, often exacerbated by the inane, mind-
numbing practices found in schools” (p. 2), which can 
be caused by “a curriculum steeped in multiple-choice 
test preparation” which “drives shallow teaching and 
learning” (p. 8). He further states that “rather than lift 
up struggling readers, an emphasis on multiple choice 
test preparation ensures that struggling readers will 
continue to struggle” (p. 8). Schools spend so much 
more time prepping for the test that quality reading 
time is being taken out of schools. read aloud time 
was my favorite part of the day.

my students were attentive when i read to them, and 
they wanted me to keep reading because they were 
immersed in the story. even my reluctant readers were 
in engrossed in listening to my read aloud. on the 
other hand, it has been my experience that reluctant 
readers do not do well with test prep curriculum. 
according to Gallagher (2009), in recent years, test 
practice type reading has overshadowed the reading 
of novels and other authentic text, and many high 



GeorGia Journal of readinG 8 Volume 41, number 2   2018

school seniors have graduated as good test takers, but 
not as avid readers. There is no excitement in learning 
reading and writing skills in isolation. if students are 
bored with the curriculum, they tend to lose interest 
in school, they are not motivated, and they grow to 
be nonreaders. it becomes less and less surprising 
that one in three high school students drops out 
(Gallagher, 2009). even the students who do not drop 
out could experience reduction in college readiness 
and even future preparedness for the job market as 
a result of the narrow test-prep curriculum. emphasis 
on “centralized curriculum, standardized testing, 
accountability, required courses of study—could kill 
creativity, the United States’ real competitive edge” 
(Zhao 2006). Gallagher (2009) implores teachers, 
literacy coaches, and administrators to recognize how 
our current practices are harming students and take a 
stand to do what is right for our students. as he puts 
it, “We need to find this courage. Today. Nothing less 
than a generation of readers hangs in the balance” (p. 
118).

fletcher (2001) posits that students perform better 
on standardized tests when their teachers focus 
on best practices, rather than teaching to the test. 
frawley (2014) states “The practice of good writing 
development needs to be facilitated despite the 
demands of the high-stakes environment…” (p. 23). 
manzo (2001) compares students who have been 
subjected to the drill and practice of isolated skills to 
those who have received effective writing instruction. 
The author reports that students in the latter category 
score better on standardized writing tests. according 
to Higgins, miller, and Wegmann (2007), “High-quality, 
evidence-based instruction need not be sacrificed in 
preparing students to succeed on standardized writing 
assessments” (p. 310). Fortunately, there are many 
ways teachers can help students become proficient 
readers and writers who read and write for a variety of 
purposes without teaching to the test.

integrating Good teaching Methods
To integrate good teaching practices, it is important 
to look at strategies that have been identified as best 
practices over the years. decades ago, murray (1972) 
described writing as a process and emphasized the 
need for teachers to focus on the process of writing, 
rather than the finished product. Flower and Hayes 
(1981) and Hayes and flower (1986) added their 

thoughts when they offered that the writing process 
is made up of the following components: planning, 
translating, and reviewing. atwell (1987) described 
her version of the writing process as “in the middle.” 
The author included prewriting and planning, drafting, 
revising, editing, and publishing. For Atwell’s writing 
workshop, she combined the writing process with 
peer and teacher conferencing and mini-lessons. in 
addition, Giacobbe (1982) named time, ownership 
and response as essential for writing.

more recently, fletcher (2017) posited that the writing 
workshop provides sustained time, ideally every day, 
for students to experiment with the written word and 
practice the craft of writing. as students are allowed 
to choose their own topics during writing workshop, 
they feel ownership over what they have written, and 
they receive response to their writing from teacher 
and peers through conferences. in addition, Votteler 
and Miller (2017) have identified the writing workshop 
and the writing process as best practices for writing 
instruction. Higgins, miller, and Wegmann (2007) 
stated that the writing workshop and the writing 
process combined with the 6+1 Traits of Writing and 
scaffolding through different modes of writing enable 
students to “write creatively and communicatively” and 
“…pass all necessary standardized tests in writing” 
(p.311). The 6 + 1 Traits include: ideas, organization, 
voice, word choice, sentence fluency, conventions, 
and presentation. The traits fit naturally into the 
writing process as students use the traits as a tool for 
revision. Students are taught in mini-lessons the art 
of assessing their own writing through the 6 + 1 Traits 
and they quickly become proficient at wordsmithing 
and editing their masterpieces.

When considering good writing strategies, it is 
important for a teacher to scaffold writing instruction for 
students by first modeling how he/she learns and what 
he/she is thinking, then gradually releasing writing 
responsibility to students. Cooper and Kiger (2003) 
describe the modes of writing instructional routines, 
which include write-aloud, shared writing, guided 
writing, collaborative or cooperative writing, and 
independent writing. This idea is based upon Pearson’s 
(1985) idea of gradual release of responsibility from 
teacher to student. if teachers model metacognition 
as well skills and procedures, students will eventually 
emulate them and become successful writers. 



GeorGia Journal of readinG 9 Volume 41, number 2   2018

according to miller and Higgins (2008), “…effective 
instructional practices and mandated testing demands 
can coexist if teachers choose methods that not 
only provide authentic learning experiences, but 
also prepare students to pass state tests. reading 
Workshop and Writing Workshop are two such 
methods that enable students to practice authentic 
reading and writing for sustained periods while honing 
their skills” (p.124). Reading and writing workshops 
go hand-in-hand. in reading workshop, students 
are engaged in reading and responding to a variety 
of texts for sustained periods of time. according to 
ivey (2000), “Giving all students, especially those 
experiencing difficulty, more time to read in school is 
the most certain way to help all students become more 
skilled and engaged, and even to be more prepared 
to achieve on standardized tests.” (p. 43). Gallagher 
(2009) stressed the importance of providing a wide 
variety of interesting authentic literature from which 
students can choose. in a typical reading workshop, 
the teacher provides an extensive range of books on 
a variety of levels, catering to many different interests 
and representing various genres. Classroom libraries 
should also include multicultural books that represent 
the cultures and ethnicities of all students in the 
classroom, as well as others. according to leland, 
Harste and Huber (2005), students develop identities 
as cultural and literate people through interactions with 
others, critical literacy instruction, and multicultural 
literature in classrooms.

a typical reading workshop format includes sustained 
silent or quiet reading time, reading response activities, 
teacher-student conferences, mini-lessons on reading 
strategies, read-aloud, shared reading experiences, 
partner reading, literature circles, and book talks or 
book sharing by teacher and students. Students work 
at their own level and at their own pace on self-selected 
reading materials (Tompkins, 2015). Teachers may 
work with small groups of students on similar levels 
in a guided reading format during this time as well to 
listen to and observe students and to give prompting 
on strategy use. in addition, the teacher spends 
time observing and collecting anecdotal records on 
students as they work independently or collaborate 
with others.

reading workshop stands in stark contrast with the 

reading passage format typically seen in today’s 
classrooms. When teachers hand students a passage 
to read and answer the questions, they are not 
reading for any other purpose than to simply answer 
the questions. if there is no purpose set before the 
reader before they begin, they will likely not pull out 
the information that was intended. additionally, the 
student has had no choice in what they will read, and 
often the passage is likely not something the student 
would find interesting.

The following is an example of a mini-lesson that 
can be done within reading workshop to address 
the requirement set forth by some districts to include 
reading passages in reading instruction. The topic of 
the mini-lesson is purpose for reading. 

● Students receive a one-page passage entitled, 
“House.” The first time they read it, they are to 
highlight what words they felt were important to the 
story. 
● Students are then instructed to read the story 
again and highlight words that a burglar would find 
important. 
● Students are then instructed a third time to read 
the passage, looking for words a real estate agent 
would find important. 
● Students and teacher then discuss the importance 
of having a purpose for reading.

reading aloud is an important part of reading 
workshop that is often left out of the school day in 
order to “fit in” other requirements that have been 
mandated by the district or state. in some schools, 
reading aloud is even frowned upon or thought to be 
wasted instructional time (layne, 2015). Shannon 
(2002) states, “The first rule of teaching literacy is to 
read to your kids” (p.6), and according to Routman 
(1991), “reading aloud should take place daily at all 
grade levels, including junior high and high school” (p. 
32). if a teacher brings reading to life with interesting 
books, there is a possibility of peaking the interest of 
even the most reluctant readers. Teachers serve as 
a model of fluent reading and expose students to a 
variety of genres and topics through read aloud. layne 
(2015) states that reading aloud to students helps to 
improve their comprehension, syntactic development, 
vocabulary, engagement, fluency, and attitudes 
towards reading. The author goes on to explain that he 
places a “Do Not Disturb” sign on his door during read 



GeorGia Journal of readinG 10 Volume 41, number 2   2018

aloud time to demonstrate to his students and others 
in the school that “something they might presume to 
be less important than ‘real instruction’ was actually 
just as important as everything else we did” (p. 27). 
avery (2002) puts it nicely when she states, “i realized 
that both the literature and the way i conducted the 
read aloud sessions provided a foundation with written 
language that touched every aspect of the children’s 
learning—and was indeed ‘teaching”” (p. 216). Read 
aloud time should be part of every school day and 
should not be squeezed out in favor of other subjects. 
Trealease (2006) suggests setting aside a certain time 
each day that is sacred as the reading time. in addition 
to that, the author recommends reading as much and 
as often as time allows.

reading and writing workshops offer a natural 
setting in which children have sustained times each 
day to practice reading and writing and orchestrate 
all of the strategies they have learned through mini-
lessons, read-alouds, conferences, think-alouds and 
modeling done by the teacher. in addition, students 
are encouraged to collaborate, which brings in the 
social nature of language (Vygotsky, 1978). according 
to Higgins, miller, and Wegmann (2007), “learning 
is constructed as students are given a variety of 
experiences, ideas, and relationships with peers and 
teachers” (p. 311). The authors state that the learning 
that occurs as a result of these experiences helps 
students to become better at reading and writing, and 
in turn, improves scores on high stakes tests.

Tompkins (2017) suggests teaching using reading 
and writing workshops throughout the school year 
to provide students with time to read and write and 
instruction on reading and writing strategies. She goes 
on to state that a couple of weeks before a standardized 
test, it is a good idea to familiarize students with the 
testing format. other than that, reading and writing 
should be taught in a natural setting in which students 
are provided meaningful, joyful, authentic experiences 
with literature (routman, 2018).

conclusion
in this article, we have offered reading and writing 
workshops as alternatives for monotonous kill and drill 
regimens, lack luster lessons, test-like writing prompts 
and reading passages with benchmarking every few 
weeks. We believe that through reading and writing 

workshops, students can experience meaningful 
and authentic literacy activities that excite them and 
help develop them as not only proficient readers and 
writers, but as people who love reading and writing. 
if students are taught to read and write well, they 
will perform well on mandated reading tests. but if 
they are only taught to be test-takers, they will never 
learn to read and write well (langer, 2002). Through 
this article, we hope to be a voice for students and 
teachers to help alleviate the pressures that come 
with high-stakes testing. We hope brennan and other 
students will grow to love reading and writing again. 
We further hope that they will not be anxious or scared 
when it is time to take the standardized test, but that 
they will feel self-assured and well prepared because 
reading and writing are something they can do well 
because they do them every day in meaningful ways. 
We hope to have reached a parent, a teacher, or an 
administrator who will stand up for what is right for 
our students so they can not only become confident 
at taking and passing high stakes tests, but they can 
grow into lifelong avid readers and writers who find joy 
in writing for themselves and for others. 

n empower members of the Gra and local 
councils to become effective leaders in the 
field of literacy.

n Provide quality reading education services to 
all Georgia educators.

n recognize exemplary individuals, local, and 
state literacy efforts.

n achieve maximum involvement of members 
at the local, state, and international levels to 
receive maximum benefits.

n Promote the goals and objectives of  
the international reading association  
of Georgia.

Georgia reading association

 Goals


